Use Pairwise Comparison to Prioritize Multiple Options
Value Generation Partners

Use Pairwise Comparison to Prioritize Multiple Options

Pairwise comparison (also known as paired comparison) is a powerful and simple tool for prioritizing and ranking multiple options relative to each other. It is the process of using a matrix-style tool to compare each option in pairs and determine which is the preferred choice or has the highest level of importance based on defined criteria. At the end of the comparison process, each option has a rank or relative rating as compared to the rest of the options.

Pairwise comparison may be useful when:

  • Quantitative, objective data is not available as part of the evaluation and decision-making process
  • It is necessary to determine which programs, projects, problems, etc., to focus on when resources are limited
  • A choice must be made from several options, and it is necessary to screen the options relative to each other
  • Decision or selection criteria must be weighted or ranked for importance relative to each other prior to using in a decision or selection matrix

Benefits of pairwise comparison include:

  • Provide a consistent and efficient approach for prioritizing or ranking multiple options
  • Provide a collaborative team environment
  • Reduce emotion and bias from the decision-making process

Pairwise Comparison Process:

  1. Assemble a team of stakeholders who are vested in the pairwise comparison options and topic
  2. List the options for comparison along the “X” and “Y” axes of the Pairwise Comparison Matrix; in the image, notice that each option is assigned a letter to represent the option in the comparison matrix
  3. Determine the criteria for comparison, such as which option is preferred in terms of cost, customer impact, financial impact, resource requirements, risk level, etc.
  4. Compare each option in the rows to each option in the columns, and place the letter of the preferred or most important option in the cell, which aligns the two options; notice that the matrix does not allow options to be compared to themselves, or to each other more than one time
  5. Once all options are compared, sum the number of times each letter appears in the matrix for the prioritization ranking of each option; note that the matrix template performs the calculation; if necessary or useful, convert the rankings to percentages
  6. Use the prioritization ranking of the options for the next phase of the decision-making process

An example of using pairwise comparison is a project team working with the sponsor to prioritize seven project deliverables. The team lists the project deliverables from “A” to “G” on both axes of the pairwise comparison matrix. Using the matrix, each deliverable is compared in pairs. (Example: Compare deliverable A to deliverable B, then deliverable A to deliverable C, etc.) During the comparison process, the sponsor determines which is the most important deliverable in the pair, and its letter is placed in the corresponding cell. At the end of the comparison, the deliverables are ranked for priority by the number of times a deliverable’s representative letter is used.

Pairwise comparison is a powerful tool for ranking and prioritizing multiple options.

Value Generation Partners wishes you much success in your pursuit of prioritizing or ranking multiple options relative to each other, thereby generating greater value in your organization!

Creating a Pairwise Comparison is useful in combination with other LinkedIn Pulse posts found at this link.

Find more on related topics in Workshop Facilitation for Success Handbook, which is available on Lulu.com and other book distributors in paperback and eBook. With the purchase of any handbook, the reader has access to a companion toolbox file containing all referenced templates.


I am one of the creators of OptionFinder software, a keypad-based technology for group input. I have used paired comparison for 20+ years to help groups see how much agreement there is among them and to prioritize options. Their input is anonymous, but can be categorized (sales, management, field operations, etc., or east, midwest, west, OUS, for example) so that the group can compare responses of various subgroups among them. I often used paired comparison to determine what the weighting of options should be on a list of criteria. Then I used OptionFinder's group rating method to assign values to the various options which, multiplied by the weights, leads to one standard type of decision making outcome. It has been phenomenally useful in many business and not-for-profit organizations. A side note: In all those years, working with about 25% of Fortune 500 companies, in almost every situation where management expected there to be wide differences of opinion, we found more agreement than disagreement, which then led to fruitful discussions. In one case, two opposing political groups supposedly "differed" on 20 issues. Our research showed that they were in close agreement on 17 of them. We could then work on just the three that needed work, and came to a consensus decision that had eluded them for months.

J Davidson Frame calls this "Poor Man's AHP" (Analytic Hierarchy Process). Not sure if he originated either the term or the technique.

Like
Reply

To view or add a comment, sign in

Others also viewed

Explore content categories